A No-Fly Zone Isn’t an Umbrella—It’s War, Former Northern Watch Commander Says

March 16, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

A no-fly zone is neither a simple nor a risk-free approach to helping Ukraine, according to retired Lt. Gen. David A. Deptula, dean of AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and a former commander of the Northern Watch no-fly zone over Iraq.

Deptula said he heard nothing new from either Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky or U.S. President Joe Biden on a no-fly zone over Ukraine in their March 16 speeches but pointed out that such a thing is “not some magical way to disperse an enemy without bloodshed.” A no-fly zone is war, he said.

It’s “full-on, direct and sustained combat with enemy forces,” he asserted. Those glibly proposing it likely don’t really appreciate what’s involved, he added.

A no-fly zone would require the answers to myriad questions that have scarcely been asked, let alone answered, Deptula said. What would be the rules of engagement? Would only Russian aircraft be targeted? Could they be targeted only over Ukraine, or over Russia, from where they could launch their missiles at ground targets?

“You have to define … the end state,” he said. “What’s the desired outcome?” Who would be the authority deciding what to shoot and what not to shoot? Would Russian aircraft on the ground be a fair target? What about search and track radars? Pilots, he said, are permitted under the Geneva Convention to defend themselves if fired upon, or if they detect preparations to shoot at them.

Would helicopters be fair game? What about cruise missiles launched from outside Ukrainian airspace?

“And who’s in charge?” Deptula wondered. “The Ukrainian military? NATO? The individual air forces? Because every air force in this coalition is probably going to have different rules of engagement.”

During operations Northern and Southern Watch, Deptula noted, coalition pilots rarely shot at airborne enemy aircraft, but, when fired upon or radar-painted from the ground, the riposte—not always the same day—would be to destroy surface-to-air missile sites, tracking radars, artillery sites, command and control targets, and others. The Iraq no-fly zone was not a “24/7, 365” affair but more frequently three or four days a week of patrols, he said.

Accompanying the fighters would have to be an armada of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft, command and control aircraft, sensor aircraft, communications planes, and aerial tankers, among others, he noted. Using all that against Russian airplanes would likely be, as Biden has previously said, engaging in World War III.

The summary question, Deptula asserted, is, “Where does it stop?”

All that said, Putin, “like all bullies,” will not stop unless the European nations and NATO stand up to him, Deptula argued. Deptula is in favor of ex-Warsaw Pact/now NATO countries providing their Russian-made aircraft and munitions to Ukraine. It would be very much like “Lend Lease” in World War II, he said, and a fair way to help Ukraine defend itself. He sees little distinction between massive lethal aid in the form of small arms, anti-tank missiles, and anti-aircraft systems and the larger gear.

The State Department clamped down on Poland’s offer to transfer its Russian-made gear to Ukraine because of Poland’s awkward wording of the offer, making the aircraft seem to come from the U.S., Deptula speculated. The offer came after Secretary of State Antony Blinken explicitly gave Poland the “green light” to make it, and Deptula thinks the idea’s not dead, yet.

“It could have been done quietly,” he said. But it still could be done.

“It’s not a silver bullet,” he said, and will not suddenly give Ukraine a victory, but “it will assist them in sustaining their aircraft,” even if the Polish MiGs are just used for parts.

“If they just use them to keep the aircraft they have in service, that’s helpful,” he said.

Air Force Verges on New Climate Action Plan as European Bases Face Energy Crisis

March 16, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

The Department of the Air Force is “on the cusp” of releasing a climate action plan that will detail its current and future efforts for renewable, resilient energy, the department’s installations czar told lawmakers March 16. The plan will come as officials grow increasingly anxious about Russia’s impact on the global energy market.

Edwin Oshiba, the acting assistant secretary of the Air Force for energy, installations, and the environment, didn’t specify to the House Armed Services readiness subcommittee exactly when the action plan would be released, but he promised that it would be “aligned with our operational imperatives to enhance resiliency and readiness while balancing mission effectiveness and fiscal efficiency.”

“It will lay out priorities and actionable objectives to address the challenges of a changing climate through improving operational energy efficiency, enhancing installation resilience, diversifying energy sources, and developing a climate literate force,” Oshiba added.

The issue of energy efficiency and resilience in the military has been raised by experts, lawmakers, and Pentagon officials before. But it has taken on new urgency in light of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and subsequent sanctions from President Joe Biden that have banned the import of Russian oil and other energy sources.

“You don’t need to look any further than today’s headlines to know that energy can be used as a weapon,” noted Meredith Berger, assistant secretary of the Navy for energy, installations, and the environment, in her testimony.

The issue is most pressing in Europe, where Russia has typically exported a vast amount of energy in the form of gas, coal, and other sources. In particular, countries such as Italy and Germany have experienced an energy crisis as of late with their Russian imports drying up—and the Air Force has locations in both nations.

Right now, those bases are dependent on the local energy sources, said Paul Cramer, acting assistant secretary of defense for energy, installations, and environment. But the current crisis is highlighting the need to bolster that approach.

“We are dependent and reliant on the host nation, regardless of whether it’s in Germany, Italy, and [in] the Pacific, for that fuel source, because even if we ran our own, we would still have to use that same source,” Cramer said. “And so the priority within the department is to build resilience to reduce that hazard. So you have multiple sources of power, not relying on one source of power. So we’ve really emphasized over the last few years microgriding so that we can create grids within grids and not rely on that; alternate sources of fuels where we have installed renewables. And to the extent that we can’t work any of those to have some redundant system to continue to operate, we’re going to get [to] the point where we’re going to produce our own electricity.”

The Air Force has been studying energy independence and resilience for installations for some time. The 2020 National Defense Authorization Act required that “major military installations plan for climate change when drafting master plans,” and the department subsequently conducted more than 80 initial assessments by July 2021.

Since then, Oshiba said, the department has published 42 installation energy plans, with 16 more coming in fiscal 2022. Those plans are “focused upon resiliency measures for installations around five key areas: robustness, resourcefulness, redundancy, response, and recovery.”

Elsewhere, the service continues to conduct “pull-the-plug” exercises to ensure it can identify vulnerabilities to infrastructure, particularly for energy and water. The department is also doing “some exciting things” to reduce its operational energy costs, by far its largest account when it comes to fuel costs.

“There’s been some work that’s been going on over the last couple of years in testing drag-reduction technologies primarily for our mobility and refilling assets,” Oshiba said. “Things like micro-veins and winglets that allow us to extend the range of our assets that provides operational reach with fewer assets, and what we call create more, if you will, loiter time to refuel our fighter assets once they’re in those refueling tracks.”

NATO to Add Support for Ukraine, Set Up ‘Persistent’ Presence on Eastern Flank

March 16, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

NATO defense ministers decided March 16 that they will augment military, financial, and humanitarian support to Ukraine and that they will drastically increase longer-term defenses for NATO’s once-neglected eastern flank.

But NATO still opposes direct intervention in Ukraine or a no-fly zone.

“Today, ministers agreed that we must continue to provide significant support to Ukraine,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said at a press briefing in Brussels following the ministerial.

The secretary-general underscored NATO’s position that it will not send in troops and not enforce a no-fly zone despite repeated calls by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who has taken to making direct appeals to the legislative bodies of the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States, virtually addressing the U.S. Congress on March 16.

“They reinforced the message of the importance of providing support with equipment, advanced equipment, air defense systems, anti-tank weapons, and many other types of support, but no NATO deployment of air or ground capabilities in Ukraine,” Stoltenberg added. “We have a responsibility to ensure that this conflict, this war, doesn’t escalate beyond Ukraine.”

In remarks before the start of the meeting, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III said the unscheduled defense ministerial was proof of a united NATO in support of Ukraine.

“Our presence here sends a signal for the world that we remain united in our support of Ukraine,” Austin said. “We condemn Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified invasion into Ukraine.”

Austin again reiterated the U.S. commitment to NATO’s Article 5 principle of collective defense. The United States has some 100,000 troops in Europe. NATO has at its command 40,000 troops from member states, of which the majority are positioned in the east.

Stoltenberg said that will not be enough going forward.

“We must reset our collective defense and deterrence for the longer term,” he said.

Military commanders have been tasked with developing plans across all domains, including “substantially more forces in the eastern part of the alliance, at higher readiness.”

Stoltenberg said it was not until Russia invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea in 2014 that NATO began to strengthen its eastern defense, and not until 2016 did NATO begin to position combat troops in the east.

Stoltenberg said there would be more pre-positioned equipment and supplies, strengthened integrated air and missile defense, and more allied airpower. At sea, it would mean carrier strike groups, submarines, and combat ships on a “persistent basis.” More training and exercises, and in greater numbers, will follow.

Asked if the forces to be positioned on the eastern flank would be permanent, Stoltenberg demurred, saying that was a political decision.

A NATO eastern flank official told Air Force Magazine that NATO is doing “more of the same” and that the Pentagon is “still rather cautious in long-term posture considerations.”

NATO heads of state will meet March 24 to discuss the changes needed for the alliance’s longer-term security. President Joe Biden is expected to attend the meeting in Brussels.

Stoltenberg also said there are no signs that Russia is serious about a cease-fire in its peace talks with Ukraine.

“On the ground, we don’t see any sign, and that’s the reason why we also call on Russia to engage in these talks in good faith,” he said.

“What Ukraine can achieve around the negotiating table is very closely linked to the situation on the battleground,” Stoltenberg added. “Therefore the support we give to them to stand up against and to resist the Russian invasion also helps them to achieve an acceptable outcome in the negotiations.”

Budget Predictions: ACE Gets Big Boost in ’23; Large Uncrewed Aircraft Fleets Needed

March 16, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

The Air Force is proposing a large budget investment in pre-positioned equipment to lay the groundwork for its agile combat employment concept, which calls for USAF forces to be widely dispersed and frequently moving to complicate enemy targeting, Pacific Air Forces commander Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach reported.

He also forecast a major investment in uncrewed and “attritable” aircraft and decoys, both to bolster USAF capacity and to present an enemy with a large number of must-shoot targets that would rapidly draw down enemy magazines; and pitched for cargo UAVs to provide logistics support to far-flung ACE operating locations.

“There’s quite a bit of money in the [fiscal year] ’23 budget, when we finally get to start pre-positioning equipment, and parts, supplies, food and water, fuel, those kind of things,” Wilsbach said during a March 14 Mitchell Institute webcast. This will alleviate an excessive demand on airlift, he said, because “if you pre-position those things, at least initially, [those are] places that you don’t have to have airlift going in, immediately supplying parts and supplies, etc. So, we’re going to have very robust pre-positioning at numerous locations around the theater.”

The ACE concept of employment was published in December and tells wing commanders how to “train to it every day” and how the concept will be implemented in PACAF and U.S. Air Forces Europe; and “what the expectations will be,” he said. “That document has been instrumental in allowing everybody to get ready and be able to win when you get there.”

In the recent Cope North exercise out of Guam, ACE concepts were employed at 10 different operating locations, incorporating several countries, he said. The exercise “moved those assets around … on a daily basis,” and they were commanded and controlled at the same time.

Japan and Australia are both keenly interested in developing their own compatible versions of ACE, he said, “particularly the Japanese, who are really trying to expand their envelope and ACE … on mainland Japan. So that’s really exciting for us, because we intend to do ACE with them, if we ever have to.” Australia is doing similar things, and is a “great partner” in the concept.

The two enabling concepts for ACE are logistics and command and control, he said, because of the “contested environment.”

There won’t be enough C-17s to go around to service all the operating locations, he said, meaning C-130s will carry a greater share of the burden. That makes sense because exercises so far have found that most of the airlift required is to carry small, line-replaceable unit parts and other objects the size of a jet engine or smaller.

“If we’re relying on the C-17 fleet to do this, we’ll run out of C-17s very quickly,” he said, especially since the strategic transports will probably be needed for noncombatant evacuation operations and to move forces into the theater. There aren’t enough C-17s even when the C-17s of allies are added to the mix.

“And you would waste the capability because, like I said, often it’s just a line replaceable unit that has to go out to an island somewhere, and you don’t need a whole C-17 to take a piece that big. So, C-130s will be a big factor in this.” A C-130 squadron at Yokota Air Base, Japan, is “frequently [doing] ACE iterations, and … they participate in the exercises as well.”

Wilsbach said he’s been “advocating for a few years for something even smaller than a C-130” that could take a person or an engine or a few parts.

“Perhaps it might even be an unmanned vehicle … but have a lot of them,” he said.

The concept is similar to the C-47s of World War II, he explained.

“There were … thousands, maybe, of C-47s, and they were all over the Pacific. And they weren’t fast, but they can carry a lot, and they tackled the logistics problem of the Pacific by having a lot of tails to … move equipment.” Although “it got there at 120, maybe 150 knots … it worked. We could have something like that for ACE, where you don’t have to have it going 500 knots,” but the logistics effort wouldn’t “eat a lot of tail numbers to be able to get the small bits of equipment and pieces to the various spots that we intend to deploy from.”

The flip side of the ACE coin is communications, Wilsbach said, calling it “pretty difficult to do” and fragile because lines of communication can be cut.

“What I’ve been asking for—and what we’re working on and approving—is a meshed, rather than network,” model, he said. He made the analogy to the human brain, which, if injured, “figures it out and finds different paths” to move messages and information around, and heal itself.

“It just happens,” he said, and with artificial intelligence and machine learning, the same will be true of the communications system the Air Force is now building for ACE.

“We want it to be self-healing so that operators aren’t working the comm gear, they’re operating and [figuring] out how to create airpower effects and executing those airpower effects, not switching frequencies and figuring out where the comm could go through.”

Wilsbach said that “if you tackle those two things—logistics and communications—ACE becomes a little more easy. It’ll still be difficult, but it’ll be easier than if we struggle with those two aspects.”

More UAVs Needed

Uncrewed aircraft will also be critical to the fight, Wilsbach said.

China’s ability to defend itself is “very robust” because of its elaborate anti-access/area denial air defense systems, he noted. The only way to “stress” those defenses is with large numbers of attritable aircraft, he said.

“What I would advocate for is to make the manned aircraft ‘exquisite’” in their capabilities “and the uninhabited aircraft … less exquisite, slightly more attritable, so that we can have more of them,” he said.

China would have to target decoys or unmanned aircraft coming toward it “because they’re not exactly sure” what those platforms are, he said, and “they’ll shoot weapons at [them] and use up their weapons.” Employing such swarmed, massed aircraft “could give you an advantage because [China would] use up their resources, shooting things that you don’t care that they shoot down. So that would be a capacity that I’m very interested in, as we go into the future.”

Not all of these unmanned aircraft should be stealthy, he said; otherwise, China would not see them and use up weapons against them.

“You give them a lot more targets to defend against,” he said. The Chinese would ignore these aircraft at their peril, because they would be equipped with sensors and weapons that could penetrate and destroy Chinese assets.

“All of these assets will have some kind of capability, whether it be a sensor … weapon truck, jammer … and they should swarm as well, so they should talk to one another and collaborate not only amongst themselves, but also with the manned platform that they’re supporting,” Wilsbach said. All this will present China with “many more dilemmas than they can handle at any given time. And what we’ve seen in exercises is, when you amass the effects, and we amass the number of weapons that are going after a particular target, they’ll be able to shoot down some—because as I’ve said, they have really good defenses—but they won’t be able to shoot them all down. And it’s the weapon that creates the final effect that you’re looking for that counts.”

Somalia Drawdown Has Been Ineffective, ‘Puts Troops at Greater Risk,’ AFRICOM Boss Says

March 15, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

It’s been more than 15 months since then-President Donald Trump ordered the Pentagon to withdraw the majority of its troops from Somalia. Since then, service members have had to “commute to work,” flying in from places such as Kenya and Djibouti to help train Somali forces and conduct operations against al-Shabab, the terrorist group that is part of al-Qaeda.

That setup, the head of U.S. Africa Command told lawmakers March 15, isn’t working.

“Our periodic engagement, also referred to as commuting to work, has caused new challenges and risks for our troops,” Army Gen. Stephen J. Townsend told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “My assessment is that it is not effective; it’s not efficient; and it puts our troops at greater risk.”

Townsend has expressed dissatisfaction with the situation before. In April 2021, he told the SASC that “our understanding of what is happening in Somalia is less now than when we were there on the ground physically located with our partners.” But Townsend also said at the time that “we’re working to make this new mode of operation work.”

In his written testimony this year, Townsend warned that “Somalia’s slow but continued steps towards stability stalled over the past year.”

At the same time, Townsend also called al-Shabab al-Qaeda’s “largest and wealthiest global affiliate” and Africa’s greatest threat to U.S. people and interests in the region and to the U.S. homeland.

With a reduced presence—less than 100 troops are still on the ground—the counterterrorism mission to combat al-Shabab has struggled, Townsend said.

“We are marching in place at best. We may be backsliding,” Townsend said. “I just think that what we’re doing is not providing sufficient pressure, and the best we can do is maintain a secure area around the bases that we return to when we really can’t get at the al-Shabab problems.”

Asked by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) whether he had asked his chain of command to restore the U.S. presence in Somalia to combat al-Shabab, Townsend declined to say but offered a hint.

“Respectfully, Senator, I have submitted advice to my chain of command, and my chain of command is still considering that advice,” Townsend said. “And I’d like to give them space to make that decision.”

Townsend has led AFRICOM for more than two-and-a-half years now, and Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) noted in his opening statement that he will likely leave the post in the coming months—no AFRICOM commander has served for more than three-and-a-half years.

While al-Shabab represents a growing threat inside the continent, Russian mercenaries are an outside factor that continue to concern Townsend and lawmakers.

So-called private military companies such as the Wagner Group are “a malign influence,” Townsend said. “They don’t follow anybody’s rules. They do what they want. They buttress dictators. They do gross violations of human rights. I think it’s bad for Africa’s security and prosperity in the future.”

Alarm over the use of such groups in the region has exploded in recent months—officials commonly believe they are connected to the Kremlin and are used strategically to leverage Russia’s larger interests in Africa.

Noting these assessments, Townsend said members of the Wagner Group “essentially run the Central African Republic” and have recently arrived in Mali in West Africa. They also are deployed in Libya and Sudan, where they extract natural resources and disrupt partnerships.

Their presence presents a number of challenges to American efforts in Africa, Townsend added.

“First, for example, overflight permissions—so with a continent as vast as Africa, we absolutely depend on air movement for everything,” Townsend said. “And when we see Wagner move in, they impose overflight restrictions, either through the government withdrawing permissions for overflight, or in the case of Libya, Wagner importing sophisticated advanced surface-to-air missile systems to protect their activities there but also deny the airspace.

“… Secondly, usurping partnerships. So as we’ve seen happen just now in Mali. The Malian government has asked the French forces to depart and instead have invited in this Russian [private military company]. And I think that is disturbing. It’s impacting our partnership with that same government as well. And I think that’s not good for Mali’s future.”

When asked what AFRICOM is doing to counter the influence of these mercenary groups, Townsend said his command has conducted information operations, “shining a spotlight” on their actions, while also counseling allies and partners not to allow such groups within their borders.

Ultimately, however, Townsend expressed optimism that such groups would be less impactful in the long run.

“An example … is in Libya, where they have worn out their welcome there. And the Libyans, even the Libyans who the Russians supported in the Civil War, now want them to depart,” Townsend said. “So, actually, I think that they’re probably their own worst enemy.”

U.S. Troop Presence on NATO’s Eastern Flank Could Expand Amid Fears of Reprisal

March 15, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

NATO defense ministers will meet in Brussels, Belgium, March 16 with leaders from Finland, Sweden, and Ukraine after Russian missiles struck some 10 miles from NATO’s border March 13. Amid concerns that Russia could target NATO’s eastern flank countries militarily for providing defense assistance to Ukraine, the defense ministers are expected to discuss expanding NATO troops’ medium- and long-term presence on the eastern flank; and new ways to help Ukraine.

“There are additional questions on the table about what type of posture the alliance should take going forward,” U.S. permanent representative to NATO, Ambassador Julianne Smith, told reporters March 15.

“Every member of this alliance right now is trying to think about what more it can do,” she said. However, she added: “Our interest is not escalating this conflict right now.”

DOD has already shot down a deal in which Poland would have given 24 MiG-29s to the U.S. for onward transfer to Ukraine.

A defense official told Air Force Magazine that the plan of flying the aircraft from Ramstein Air Base, Germany—a U.S. and NATO base and headquarters of NATO Air Command—would have made it “impossible” to claim that NATO was not involved in the conflict.

“It depends on how it’s done,” the official said of the possibility of an aircraft transfer in the future. “Lots of people are giving weapons to Ukraine, but they’re not getting the green light from NATO to do it.”

Smith said the “mechanics” of moving the Polish fighter jets into Ukraine, such as pilots and missiles, made the Polish plan “untenable,” but she left the door open for future bilateral transfers of aircraft to Ukraine. In the failed Polish deal, the U.S. had discussed backfilling Poland’s air defense deficit with F-16s. A Pentagon official told Air Force Magazine there is no active consideration of backfill options.

Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby likewise told Air Force Magazine that DOD is not opposed to transfer of aircraft to Ukraine.

“If another nation decides to transfer aircraft, that is a sovereign decision we would respect,” he said via email.

The U.S. and NATO have repeatedly rejected calls by President Volodymyr Zelensky to establish a no-fly zone, stating that such a move would be escalatory. In an address to the Canadian parliament March 15, Zelensky again called for a no-fly zone. He is set to address the U.S. Congress virtually at 9 a.m. March 16.

Smith reiterated the U.S. opposition to a no-fly zone as escalatory ahead of the NATO defense ministerial.

President Joe Biden, however, signed a new $13.6 billion aid package to Ukraine March 15, just days after a defense package approved March 12 worth $200 million. Not counting the new money from Congress, during his presidency Biden has authorized $1.2 billion in assistance to Ukraine and $550 million in the past two weeks.

Eastern Flank Assistance to Ukraine and Potential for Russian Blowback

Before Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III departed for Brussels on March 15, a senior defense official describing efforts to deliver new assistance to Ukraine told Air Force Magazine that DOD is trying to “get them the systems that they’re good at using,” including Turkish drones, surface-to-air missile systems, man-portable air defense systems, and Javelin anti-tank missiles.

After meeting with defense ministers, Austin is slated to visit NATO eastern flank allies Slovakia and Bulgaria.

A defense official from Romania, one of America’s staunchest NATO eastern flank allies, told Air Force Magazine that the Black Sea country expects blowback from Russia for helping to arm Ukraine, making NATO’s eastern flank defenses ever more important.

“We need to act, not to react, and we need to do something that will assure that Article 5 can realistically be put in place,” the official said, referring to the North Atlantic Treaty’s provision for mutual defense. “It’s easy to say that everybody agrees with Article 5, but if you don’t have the resources, Putin will find out that is bluffing, and he will play accordingly.”

Romania was pleasantly surprised by the unified NATO response with troops sent to the eastern flank before and after Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine.

“That’s a credible deterrence. It means safety and also increases resilience,” the Romanian defense official said.

“The U.S. reacted very well on the air support,” the official added, citing the presence of eight F-16s at Fetesti Air Base and the recent deployment of two F-35s from Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany, all part of a NATO enhanced air policing mission. The Romanian official believes Russian President Vladimir Putin has designs for Russian forces to remain in Ukraine long-term. Romania shares a mountainous northern border with Ukraine south of Lviv and a marshy land border along the Black Sea, near Odessa.

“Do you expect in one month to have everything cleared up and to go? That is not real,” the official said of Russia’s troop presence in Ukraine. “He’s not there to leave.”

As one of the countries providing arms to Ukraine in the form of hundreds of tons of ammunition, Romania believes it could be a future target.

On March 12, the Russian Defense Ministry warned that convoys of defense assistance are legitimate military targets.

Romania’s Air Force consists of American-made F-16s and refurbished Soviet-era MiG-21s modified by Elbeit Systems to NATO standard avionics, which prevents Romania from possibly giving such aircraft to Ukraine. Romania’s air defense systems likewise include a Patriot missile battery and HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System) multiple-launch rocket systems, neither of which are used by Ukraine.

Even if Romania could send aircraft, the official believed that such a transfer is a red line that requires NATO approval.

“To provide fighter airplanes to a country that is in war needs to have a NATO approval,” the official said. “You cannot do [that bilaterally] as a country because if you are involved, you involve NATO.”

For now, Romania is safe. But the country still calls for a larger and enduring U.S. troop presence, an issue that will be discussed at the NATO ministerial.

“I think one of the reasons we’re having ministers meet here in Brussels tomorrow is to talk about other steps that collectively we can take to reinforce NATO’s eastern flank,” said Smith, “and whether or not we need to map out in more detail a medium and longer-term plan. So, stay tuned on that front.”

The U.S. defense official told Air Force Magazine the NATO talks may lead to an expanded permanent U.S. presence on the eastern flank.

“The Poles and Romanians are likely to get what they’ve been looking for for a long time, which is some kind of enduring U.S. presence,” the official said.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force is continuing to rotate aircraft in, around, and through NATO partner nations and airspace.

“We move them around on a regular basis. We are doing ACE essentially,” the official said, referring to the agile combat employment doctrine.

“There’s a certain degree of strategic predictability and tactical unpredictability. The aircraft can be in Spangdahlem today, or they could be in the Baltics tomorrow,” the official added. “If we got into a fight with the Russians, we can be very unpredictable, where these things go and how they operate.”

New Missile Tracking Satellites Could Be in Orbit by 2025

March 15, 2022 | By Amanda Miller

The Defense Department could have higher-resolution, global missile warning and tracking in place as soon as 2025.

Congress seeded “Tranche 1” of the Space Development Agency’s Tracking Layer of its planned multi-use satellite constellation in the newly passed fiscal 2022 spending bill. The extra $550 million Congress gave SDA, above what the Pentagon asked for, in fiscal 2022 means the Tracking Layer could go live in early 2025 instead of in 2026.

SDA awarded contracts to SpaceX and L3Harris Technologies in October 2021 to build the first generation of Tracking Layer satellites, which SDA refers to as “Tranche 0.” In a call with reporters March 15, an official said the $550 million is only the beginning of funding Tranche 1, estimating that the first batch of 28 satellites in Tranche 1 of the Tracking Layer will total $2.5 billion. The remainder would have to come from future budgets.

Similar to SDA’s Transport Layer of satellites for moving data around, batches of new satellites would also refresh the Tracking Layer every two years. Each Tracking Layer satellite should last four or five years.

Being situated in low Earth orbit will give the Tracking Layer satellites an advantage over DOD’s current infrared satellites orbiting higher up, an official said, in part because of proximity. With more satellites, the constellation will also be more resilient.

The SDA relocates in fiscal 2022 from its place in the DOD’s organizational chart within the office of the undersecretary of defense for research and engineering to become part of the Space Force. It awarded contracts for the 126 satellites that will make up “Tranche 1” of the Transport Layer in February, dividing up the work between Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and York Space Systems.

Facing Future Threats, Time for Air Force to Stockpile Munitions is Now, Experts Say

March 15, 2022 | By Nick Adde

Like their colleagues throughout the Air Force, the service’s top munitions experts hail the potential of cutting-edge aircraft such as the F-35 Lightning II and B-21 Raider. But without enough of the right kind of munitions, they believe, these and other platforms could fall short of their potential when most needed.

“We lack a deep bench of stores for them when it comes to key weapons,” retired Maj. Gen. Larry Stutzriem told a March 3 audience during a panel discussion at the AFA Warfare Symposium.

Stutzreim, who moderated the discussion, is director of research at AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. He added that the munitions industrial complex is not large enough to surge production of necessary munitions when crises would demand it.

“This all adds up to the conclusion that it’s time to have a concerted focus on munitions,” Stutzriem said, as he introduced the panel, including John Corley of the Air Force Research Laboratory; and the retired Lt. Gen. David A. Deptula and retired Col. Mark Gunzinger of the Mitchell Institute.

Gunzinger, the institute’s director of Future Concepts and Capability Assessments, alluded to the recent Russian invasion of Ukraine. U.S. and allied forces would have to go on the offensive “within hours—not wait weeks” to build up sufficient force structure before beginning a campaign, he said.

“That means airpower will be the predominant means to rapidly respond from inside and outside the theater, to strike those thousands of targets in hundreds of hours, to blunt an invasion,” Gunzinger said.

Further, Gunzinger described the stockpile of long- and short-range precision-guided munitions (PGMs) as “unbalanced,” thus reducing the number of targets that can be hit.

Deptula, the institute’s dean, added, “the Air Force needs to … move out smartly to develop a new generation of mid-range standing PGMs that cost less than long-range weapons, to help develop the PGM inventory.”

These new weapons should be designed for low observability, Deptula said, and carry other features designed to penetrate advanced integrated air defense systems.

“The threat of pure conflict today is real,” Corley said.

While Operation Desert Storm involved some 45,000 aim points, a conflict with China or Russia could entail 100,000 or more, Corley said.

“Do we have the number of weapons on hand to deal with [that] magnitude of threat? No, we don’t have the capacity to … generate that number of weapons in a matter of weeks. So we need to start stockpiling more munitions with the capabilities that we desire,” Corley said, adding that digital engineering would help meet the demand quickly and at a realistic price.

Gunzinger closed his remarks with a warning.

“We can have the best fifth- and sixth-gen Air Force in the world. We can have the largest bomber force in the world, and we can have NGADs [Next Generation Air Dominance fighters] out of our ears,” Gunzinger said. “If they don’t have weapons, that does not translate into combat power. And Gen. Deptula is exactly right. The time to buy these weapons is now.”

Here’s How Airmen Are Training to Survive in the Arctic

March 15, 2022 | By Amy Hudson

JOINT BASE ELMENDORF-RICHARDSON, Alaska—The temperature hovered in the mid-teens, and the skies were crystal blue here March 14 as members of the Alaska Air National Guard’s 211th Rescue Squadron prepared for a seven-hour round-trip flight north, well into the Arctic Circle. The mission, part of the ongoing biannual Arctic Edge exercise, was to drop an Arctic Sustainment Package, consisting of Guardian Angel Airmen and a pallet of survival gear, onto an ice pack 200 miles off the northern coast of Alaska where they would set up camp.

Despite the near-perfect conditions on the ground, the weather can change in an instant in the Arctic, and crews know they must be prepared for anything.

“Weather is great here, but it doesn’t look great up north,” said Capt. Chris McKnight, the mission’s HC-130J pilot. “It’s [going to be] white on white. It’s like flying in a golf ball.”

The temperature also will plummet. Depending on the time of year, it could drop as low as minus 60 degrees in Alaska. When the rear ramp opens on this mission, McKnight will be flying 130 knots—about 150 miles per hour—and the temperature will be at least minus 20 degrees, likely colder. That kind of freezing wind is enough to shock anyone’s system, but Capt. Miles Brodsky, a combat rescue officer with the Alaska ANG’s 212th Rescue Squadron and the flight commander for the mission, said, “It’s one of the most amazing experiences ever.”

But training is key to survival.

“People talk about flow state, or like, hyper-focused,” Brodsky told Air Force Magazine during an interview on base before the flight. “It’s like everything we train for coming up to that one moment. It’s almost like everything goes in slow motion, and you can see every step forward, 10 steps at a time. It is the ultimate ‘being in the moment,’ I would say, because you’re just completely focused on executing this mission properly and getting out of the plane.”

The 212th has a unique mission. It is the only unit in the entire Department of Defense with an Arctic Sustainment Package capability—Canada is the only other country in the world with the capability, said Lt. Col. John Romspert, commander of the 212th RQS. Created in 2010 after the Northwest Passage and Polar Ice Cap started melting, making room for more Arctic exploration, tourism, and nation building, the baseline Arctic Sustainment Package is capable of treating 23 people in 96 hours in the harshest of conditions.

It includes one combat rescue officer, a survival, evasion, resistance, and escape (SERE) specialist, and four pararescue jumpers. They jump with up to five modular pallets of survival gear, including everything from vehicles to tents.

The SERE specialist will help set up the camp and keep an eye out for rapidly changing environmental conditions as the PJs treat any survivors on the ground and the combat rescue officer focuses on resupply and getting everyone safely home, Romspert said.

“What a lot of people who don’t operate in the Arctic realize is how dynamic it is,” he said. “It could be clear blue when you jump in, and 45 minutes later, you’re in a storm that lasts for 10 days at minus 60 degrees. So, just because you got in, doesn’t mean you’re going to get out right away. It takes a team effort and constant coordination to make sure that the operation is just running smoothly.”

In the Arctic, the weather is the biggest adversary, and Airmen operating in these conditions need to understand how to control their own body temperature. Too many layers, and you might start sweating, and that could freeze later and lead to hypothermia. Not enough layers, and again, hypothermia could set in.

“We are constantly managing our own bodies in the situation, our own layers, just to exist in the environment,” Brodsky said. “We always have to be thinking ahead because if we’re staying in the evening, or a couple of nights, the environment becomes a huge factor … It’s just a constant challenge … that’s why we train a lot.”

Arctic Edge, which runs through March 17, is a U.S Northern Command-scheduled exercise with some 1,000 U.S. and Canadian forces participating. First held in 2018, it takes place every two years, with the goal of providing realistic training throughout Alaska. It is the largest joint exercise in Alaska this year and one of several occurring simultaneously, including the National Guard’s Arctic Eagle/Patriot, the U.S. Army’s Joint Pacific Multinational Readiness Capability exercise, and the U.S. Navy’s ICE-X.

“Arctic operations and exercises such as Arctic Edge demonstrate the capabilities utilized to defend our homeland and our interests,” said Lt. Gen. David A. Krumm, commander of Alaskan North American Aerospace Defense Command, Alaskan Command, and 11th Air Force. “To deter day-to-day, de-escalate in crisis, and if required, defeat in conflict, we must be able to operate and thrive in the Arctic.”